If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Tax Bill Bringing Big Changes to College Athletics

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Yes, and I theorized a flat rate based on income for defense was a reasonable way to do it - even though a property tax on assets would be another way. The more you have the more you have to be defended.

I know this was not your intention, but you make sound like wealthy people's lives are more valuable than others. The more you have, the more you have to be defended? If you're dead, you're dead! Leaving behind $millions of property vs. a $90,000 3/2 house is irrelevant, ain't it?

No, I think every American needs to pay for and support National Defense, since we all benefit equally from it.

Re: Tax Bill Bringing Big Changes to College Athletics

Originally Posted by dawg80

I know this was not your intention, but you make sound like wealthy people's lives are more valuable than others. The more you have, the more you have to be defended? If you're dead, you're dead! Leaving behind $millions of property vs. a $90,000 3/2 house is irrelevant, ain't it?

No, I think every American needs to pay for and support National Defense, since we all benefit equally from it.

Re: Tax Bill Bringing Big Changes to College Athletics

Originally Posted by dawg80

I know this was not your intention, but you make sound like wealthy people's lives are more valuable than others. The more you have, the more you have to be defended? If you're dead, you're dead! Leaving behind $millions of property vs. a $90,000 3/2 house is irrelevant, ain't it?

No, I think every American needs to pay for and support National Defense, since we all benefit equally from it.

And don’t forget if you are saying every life costs the same to defend you would need to add the cost of defending minors lives to their parent’s tax bill too.

Re: Tax Bill Bringing Big Changes to College Athletics

Originally Posted by dawg80

obummer inherited an $8 trillion debt, and left it at $19 trillion. Now, whose supporters prefer to pass on that tax bill?

Just more of the double standard Dems/Libs/socialist distorted thinking. It seems as if they were put on earth to create havoc and rebellion, try and avert God's wishes and create the tinder box to then start wars.

Re: Tax Bill Bringing Big Changes to College Athletics

I'm for the cutting the hell outta of the federal budget.

As for what Trump's plan will do...well, JFK, Reagan, and Bill Klinton grew contributions to the US Treasury with tax cuts/spending cuts to the federal budget. Most intelligent people think giving that model a chance makes sense. However! since obummer/reid/Pelosi blew up the national debt, some measures are needed to undo that damage. Those that benefited the most from the Three Stooges' policies, must now pay the piper. Namely, immigrants. Last year we spent $135 billion on illegal/migrant aliens. That's just one example. Cut it to $zero. Not one penny more to any non-US citizens.

Actually, it's hard to find where exactly obummer et al spent all that money. He gutted the military, got so bad that at the end of his term we had NO aircraft carriers at sea due to lack of maintenance. Our nation's infrastructure got exponentially worse during his 8 years. So, the money wasn't spent there. Public schools/education got worse. Guess it was all those "free" cell phones taxpayers bought for obummer's followers.

Well, anyway, point is huge cuts are needed in federal spending. And!, sorry, but the wealthy need to shoulder more of the tax burden to get the debt trending down. I advocate something like this:

on personal income, income levels of $500K and up should have income tax increases, but! with a sunset provision built in, say three years. The increase automatically expires, say 12/31/21. To continue the higher taxes, Congress would have to pass a new bill. If they don't, those people's taxes return to current levels.

For everyone else, starting with the lowest income earners, a graduated tax cut. But those who pay NO federal taxes do NOT get a check, like they do now. I don't know exactly where to draw the line, since I don't have a copy of the federal budget, but just for discussion sake, say, everyone below that $500K income level, gets the first $30,000 tax exempt. A married couple, filing jointly, with a total income of $50,000 pays taxes on $20,000 at a low rate. There would be brackets up to that $500K level, with increasing %.

For businesses, including major corporations, only REAL business expenses are deductible. I would tighten up what qualifies as a "real" expense.

Summary:

HUGE cuts to the federal budget, a lot of that can be accomplished by reducing headcount in federal employees, and no more give-aways.
Tax increases to PERSONAL income of the highest earners, but protecting legitimate deductions for businesses.
Tax cuts to the lower and middle classes to stimulate the economy (since it's those people toward the bottom that spend like drunken sailors)

If the national debt shrinks, then fine, keep it going. If it doesn't (although it should), then make MORE cuts to the federal budget.